Exxon Mobil is the world's largest oil company and one of the world's largest publicly traded companies. It is involved in oil and gas exploration, production, supply, transportation, and marketing around the world. In 2010 it reported proved reserves of 24.8 billion barrels of oil equivalent. Exxon Mobil's refineries have a capacity of more than 6 million barrels per day, and the company supplies refined products to more than 40,000 service stations in 100 countries that operate under the Exxon, Esso, and Mobil brands (including more than 16,000 in the US)." [1]

Support for the American Legislative Exchange Council

Exxon Mobil is a longtime member of the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC). Randy Smith, Exxon Mobil Government Affairs Manager, represents Exxon Mobil on ALEC's corporate ("Private Enterprise") board as of 2011.[3] (Smith also sits on Pennsylvania Governor Tom Corbett's Marcellus Shale Advisory Commission that considers the impact of oil drilling through the practice known as "fracking." [4])

ALEC is a corporate bill mill. It is not just a lobby or a front group; it is much more powerful than that. Through ALEC, corporations hand state legislators their wishlists to benefit their bottom line. Corporations fund almost all of ALEC's operations. They pay for a seat on ALEC task forces where corporate lobbyists and special interest reps vote with elected officials to approve “model” bills. Learn more at the Center for Media and Democracy's ALECexposed.org, and check out breaking news on our PRWatch.org site.

It was a "Chairman" level sponsor of 2011,[5] 2013,[6] and 2016 American Legislative Exchange Council Annual Conferences, which in 2010, equated to $50,000.[7] It was a "Vice Chairman" level sponsor of the 2012,[8] 2014,[9] and 2015 ALEC Annual Conferences,[10] which in 2010, equated to $25,000.

Exxon Mobil contributed $50,000 for ALEC's annual conference, $110,000 for general operating support, $5,000 for membership, $25,000 for project support and $3,200 for miscellaneous reasons in 2002. [11]

Exxon Mobil contributed $90,000 for ALEC's annual conference, $80,000 for in 2005 for Energy Sustainability Project, and $71,000 for general operating support. The amount totaled to $241,000 in 2005. [12]

Exxon Mobil contributed $15,000 for ALEC's annual meeting, $31,000 for annual meeting sponsorship, $10,000 for general support, and $30,000 for undisclosed use. The amount totaled to $86,000 in 2006. [13]

Exxon's Net Income vs. Number of Employees

On September 22, 2011, MSNBC's Rachel Maddow commented on the growth of the Koch brothers' fortune, noting that, rather than being "job creators," as their fortune has risen since 2007, the number of people employed by Koch Industries has fallen. She then commented that Exxon Mobil's net income growth has also been inversely related to its number of employees. She showed the following chart of Exxon's net income vs. number of employees from 2005 to 2008:[18]

2006 and beyond

In October 2006, two US Senators, Olympia Snowe, (R-Maine), and Jay Rockefeller, (D-W.Va.) wrote to ExxonMobil's chairman and CEO Rex W. Tillerson, asking that it "end any further financial assistance" to groups "whose public advocacy has contributed to the small but unfortunately effective climate change denial myth." The Senators singled out the Competitive Enterprise Institute and TechCentralStation as such groups. They wrote that "we are convinced that ExxonMobil's long-standing support of a small cadre of global climate change skeptics, and those skeptics' access to and influence on government policymakers, have made it increasingly difficult for the United States to demonstrate the moral clarity it needs across all facets of its diplomacy". [3]

Exxon's public tone on climate change has softened since Tillerson took the reins of the company at the beginning of 2006, replacing the often-combative Lee Raymond. Tillerson has said that nations should work toward a global policy to fight climate change and in 2006 [and again in 2007] the company stopped funding a handful of groups that were climate change skeptics.

Or not...

But Exxon continued to fund a further 28 groups which campaigned against climate science. And the Center for Science in the public Interest stated in June 2008, "Each group continued to receive Exxon funding in 2007 after the company’s first announcement that it would discontinue the payments. Exxon did not immediately return calls seeking comment on how serious it was in following through on its plans." [21].

In 2011, the Global Warming Policy Foundation's website ran the headline "900+ Peer-Reviewed Papers Supporting Skepticism Of 'Man-Made' Global Warming (AGW) Alarm," listing more than 900 papers which, according to the GWPF, refute "concern relating to a negative environmental or socio-economic effect of AGW, usually exaggerated as catastrophic." However, a preliminary data analysis by the Carbon Brief revealed that nine of the ten most prolific authors cited have links to organisations funded by ExxonMobil, and the tenth has co-authored several papers with Exxon-funded contributors. The top ten contributors alone were responsible for 186 of the papers (over 20%) cited by the Global Warming Policy Foundation.[22]

Dr Sherwood Idso was the most cited academic on the list, having authored or co-authored 67 of the 938 papers, seven percent of the total. Idso is president of the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change, a thinktank which has been funded by ExxonMobil. Idso has also been linked to the Information Council on the Environment ( ICE ), an energy industry PR campaign accused of "astroturfing". The second most cited is Dr Patrick Michaels - with 28 papers to his name. Michaels is a well known climate sceptic who has revealed that he receives around 40% of his funding from the oil industry. Third most cited is Agricultural scientist Dr Bruce Kimball - the list shows that all of his cited papers were co-authored with Dr Sherwood B Idso.[22]

2009+: Lobbying expenditures continue

In 2009, Exxon Mobil spent $27.5 million in lobbying against global warming, which is their second highest year on the books after 2008 election year. [23] Odwyer's Magazine describes Exxon's efforts as misleading: "ExxonMobil, absurdly praised in August by Forbes as “green company of the year,” was discovered the same month by the New York Times to have given major funding to industry groups like the now-defunct Global Climate Coalition, an organization that had silenced its own scientific reports and falsified information for more than a decade." [24]

In 2010, the Walkley Foundation, the professional development arm of Australia's media union the Media Entertainment and Arts Alliance, chose Exxon Mobil as the Gold sponsor for its August 2010 annual conference. In July, there were reports on the Australian Broadcasting Corporation's PM program and News Corporation's The Australian[4] that Exxon Mobil had broken its pledge not to fund climate skeptics. The Australian Centre for Independent Journalism (ACIJ) opposed the sponsorship and began a public petition [5] signed by journalists, environmentalists and academics asking the union to reconsider their agreement.

Exxon's Tiger PR

Recognizing Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's visit to Washington, in mid-July 2005 ExxonMobil ran a quarter-page ad on the op-ed page of New York Times headlined "Saving Tigers." [6] According to Exxon's website, the company has given more than $9 million since 1995 to efforts to save endangered tigers. Exxon has claimed the tiger as its brand mascot since the 1930s. While "preserving the endangered Bengal tiger" did make its way in to an early State Department press release on the summit, India's nuclear industry, the global war on terrorism and foreign investment in India were the dominate themes of the meeting. The agreement to help India further develop its nuclear energy capacity is part of a larger U.S.-India Energy Dialogue that also includes an Oil and Gas Working Group that "will endeavor to strengthen mutual energy security and promote stable energy markets." Several NGOs have targeted ExxonMobil, criticizing the company for violating human rights and destroying the environment.

Exxon tries to explain their profits

After enjoying the largest profits of any company ever in recent years [7], Exxon Mobil has the resources -- and the need -- for expanded PR. The new campaign will "educate consumers and media about the inner workings of the oil industry, and the costs of producing, shipping, and refining crude," reports PR Week. It will include "PR, advertising, and media tours," as well as opinion pieces and meetings with editorial boards, including with regional and local media. Exxon will also give its "Energy Outlook" talk "at college campuses, high schools, and to academics." [8]

According to PR Week, "while Exxon works with a number of PR firms, including Weber Shandwick," the new campaign is "entirely in-house." After earning a record-breaking $36.1 billion last year, Exxon wants to avoid backlash from consumers angry about high gas prices and weaken support for the Windfall Profits Tax proposals before Congress. [9]

While no doubt there are many factors involved in the escalating price of gas, Exxon's public relations ploy of deflecting any attention away from Big Oil's role seems to be working. A recent Gallup Poll suggests that, "Ironically, the intensity with which Americans see oil companies as "gas price villains" may be fading a little, according to opinions respondents volunteered in a new Gallup Poll, conducted May 19-21. Over the past year, the percentage of Americans blaming the oil companies for skyrocketing gas prices fell from 34% to 20%; the percentage pointing to oil refinery problems fell from 16% to 9%; and those attributing the increase in prices to problems in the Middle East and the Iraq war fell from 13% to 8%. On the other hand, the percentage of Americans suggesting prices are increasing as a result of the economic forces of supply and demand increased from 10% to 15%, while 6% now point to speculators and 4% to the shrinking value of the dollar and the poor U.S. economy -- both new reasons not even mentioned a year ago. More Americans also mention crude oil prices, the shortage of oil supplies, and U.S. dependency on foreign oil" [10].

ExxonMobil and fracking

ExxonMobil bought unconventional gas producer XTO Energy in 2009 and the companies merged in 2010.[25] By 2012, ExxonMobil was the largest gas producer in the U.S. CEO Rex Tillerson is a vocal support of accessing shale gas through fracking and is against federal regulation of the practice. Tillerson told Fortune that "The assertions that our [fracking] opponents make — why don't you ask them to produce some facts, produce something? I mean, prove it."[26]

Ad boycott against Air America Radio

ExxonMobil refused to advertise on the progressive Air America Radio. In October 2006, around 90 companies, including ExxonMobil, told ABC Radio Networks that they did not want their ads to play on radio stations that carried Air America Radio. [28][29][30]

Political contributions

Open Secrets reports that during the 2010 campaign season, ExxonMobil gave $1,274,762 to federal candidates: $132,970 to Democrats and $1.13 million to Republicans.

Lobbying

Exxon is one of the largest energy company contributors to both Republican and Democratic candidates for Congress. In 2010, ExxonMobil spent $12.5 million on lobbying.[32] You can see a list of current lobbyists working for ExxonMobil HERE. There is also a list of the bills ExxonMobil has lobbied for in the past five years HERE.

These contributions total $676,177 to the 110th US Congress (as of the third quarter), the largest of which has been to Rep. John Cornyn (R-TX) for $46,000. Rep. Cornyn, for his part, has consistently voted with the oil industry on energy, war and climate bills.[11]

Contributions like this from fossil fuel companies to members of Congress are often seen as a political barrier to pursuing clean energy.

The company spent $14,520,000 for lobbying in 2006. Of this total, $1,055,000 was spent using outside lobbying firms, two of which included Nickles Group and DCI Group. [33]

Fracking

It was reported in July 2013 that Exxon Mobil subsidiary XTO Energy Inc., "signed a consent decree filed in U.S. Middle District Court in which it has agreed to pay a $100,000 Environmental Protection Agency civil penalty" for an llegal discharge of fluids from a Marcellus Shale natural gas well site in Lycoming County, Pennsylvania. The Texas company will also spend "spend $20 million to implement preventive measures and the required recycling and disposal of fluids from hydraulic fracturing and well operations."[34]

Corporate Accountability

Violation Tracker

Discover Which Corporations are the Biggest Violators of Environmental, Health and Safety Laws in the United States
Violation Tracker is the first national search engine on corporate misconduct covering environmental, health, and safety cases initiated by 13 federal regulatory agencies. Violation Tracker is produced by the Corporate Research Project of Good Jobs First. Click here to access Violation Tracker.

Labor

Human Rights

March 2005: “Pumping Poverty- Britain’s Department for International Development and the Oil Industry”
The author discusses the problems with ExxonMobil, especially the human rights problems with the Chad-Cameroon oil project and pipeline. [12] & [13]

Special Issues and Campaigns: World Report 1999
The joint venture of the United States-based Exxon, the French Elf Aquitaine, and Netherlands-based Royal Dutch/Shell which is constructing the $4 billion Chad-Cameroon oil pipeline was criticized throughout the year because of allegations of corruption and its detrimental effects on the environment and human rights. [14]

Environment

Exxon Valdez Oil Spill in Alaska
March 24, 1989, the tanker Exxon Valdez, ran aground on the Bligh Reef in Prince William Sound, Alaska. The tanker spilled approximately 10.9 million gallons of its 53 million gallon crude oil cargo. This oil spill would eventually impact over 1,100 miles of Alaska's coastline, making the Exxon Valdez the largest oil spill to date in U.S. waters. [35]